Abstract

Digital recording, editing and signal processing offer performers and producers of Western
European art music unprecedented levels of control over every sonic facet of the recorded artefact. Yet
it is often the case that the ways in which these levels of control are exercised in the recording studio
seem to contradict or at least partially go against the findings of musicologists, and specifically analysts
of classical music. This paper will suggest that this situation is the result of differing approaches:
musicologists usually look at scores while performers and producers listen to music in the recording
studio. Hence, while scores may contain structural elements that are visually evident to music analysts
(and perhaps also composers), some of these elements may not necessarily be easily perceptible aurally
to studio performers, producers, and indeed the general record listening public. The paper will illustrate
this point with the example of the use of the golden mean in the temporal proportions of the sonata form
movements of Mozart's piano sonatas. Although these proportions are clearly visible in the scores,
most studio performers and producers choose to produce recorded performances that only rarely
contain temporal proportions that are based on the golden mean. This paper will conclude with the
suggestion that the very process of recording, by dealing specifically with the art of manipulating sound
in time, provides musicologists with, in some circumstances, more appropriate ways to approach the
structural analysis of classical music.